Over several decades, studies of the relationship between task conflict and team innovation have yielded mixed findings. In the present study, drawing on the resource-based view (RBV), we consider that task conflict can activate a dynamic pool of knowledge resources and argue that the impact of task conflict on team innovation is dependent upon the knowledge integration capacity of a team, which is defined as a team’s ability to effectively combine, capitalize, and utilize the resource pool. A study of 59 teams revealed that, in general, task conflict and team innovation exhibit an inverted U-shape relationship, which was moderated by knowledge integration capability. The implications of our findings with respect to conflict research and conflict management are discussed.
Over the past two decades, studies on the relationship between team job‐related diversity and creativity have yielded mixed findings. Drawing on the dynamic capability perspective, we argue that previous studies have underestimated the importance of a team's capability for utilizing diversity. In this study, we re‐examine the mixed findings on the relationship between diversity of educational background and team creativity by adding the consideration of knowledge integration capability. The results from a sample of 47 work teams support the significant moderating effect of knowledge integration capability on the curvilinear relationship between educational diversity and team creativity. The implications of our findings and the directions for future research are also discussed.
Promotive voice is essential for improving team and organization performance. Yet in the current literature, less was known regarding the psychological reasons why people engage in promotive voice. Through the lens of social exchange, we proposed that employees who received support from colleagues may develop higher level of felt obligation for constructive change which leads to promotive voice. Analyses of multi-source data from 51 cross-functional sources (51 team supervisors and 162 employees) showed that employees’ felt obligation for constructive change positively mediates the relationship between colleague support and promotive voice behavior. Moreover, the impact of colleague support on felt obligation for constructive change is stronger when there is a low level of subgroup formation in the team. Theoretical and practical implications of these findings are discussed.
In this study, we closely examined the transformation from task conflict to relationship conflict and the conditions under which this transformational process is more likely to occur. Based on social identity approach, we suggest that when differing opinions originate from outgroup rather than ingroup members, team members will tend to misattribute the motivations of the conflicting behaviors, causing task conflict to evolve into relationship conflict. We conducted 2 studies to test our hypothesis. In Study 1, 60 4-person teams participated in a simulated task. In Study 2, we used 45 operational teams to further confirm our hypothesis and validate the generalization of the results. The results of both studies support our hypothesis that under a high level of subgroup perception, task conflict is more likely to transform into relationship conflict, which also demonstrates the significance of information source is just as important as, or even more important than the conflicting ideas themselves. The theoretical implications of this study and the new insights that it offers are noted.
Paradoxical arguments and mixed empirical evidence coexist in the current literature concerning the relationship between team familiarity and team innovation. To resolve this contradiction, we apply habitual routines theory to propose that team familiarity and team innovation have an inverted U-shaped relationship. Using a data set of 68,933 R&D teams in the electrical engineering industry, our results support a nonlinear relationship between team familiarity and team innovation, and suggest that the best innovative performance is produced by moderately familiar teams. Furthermore, we find that external learning can moderate this curvilinear relationship. Theoretical contributions and future implications are discussed.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.